A clearer RFP.
More comparable proposals.

DiningScope · Planning template · Version 0.1 · September 19, 2026

Use this template to give prospective providers the same requirements and request comparable responses. Replace bracketed fields, remove irrelevant sections, and keep unanswered items visible. The tables work for a preliminary scope conversation as well as a more formal request for proposals.

This is an original planning resource. It contains no market-price benchmarks or completed customer data. Have your organization's responsible teams review sector-specific requirements before issuing a final RFP.

1. Project at a glance

Write a short project description:

[We need help with ___ at ___. Our current challenge is ___. We expect service for approximately ___, using the volume definitions below. A successful proposal will explain ___.]

2. Service calendar and volume

Distinguish eligible population from people present, people served, meals, and transactions. One person can generate multiple meals or transactions. State the unit for every estimate.

Add:

• Operating days in the comparison period: [days], accounting for holidays, closures, and seasonal changes.
• Population on site by weekday or shift: [schedule and source].
• Known growth, attendance changes, events, or construction: [details].
• Current participation, if known: [numerator / denominator; definition and period].
• Low, base, and high planning scenarios: [volumes and reason for each].

Ask each provider to identify the volume assumptions behind its price and what changes if actual volume differs.

3. Facilities and operating conditions

Describe the kitchen, service points, storage, seating, loading access, and available equipment. Attach an equipment list with ownership, condition, and known constraints where available.

State whether providers can visit, which documents they can inspect, and how questions and answers will be shared consistently among participants.

4. Responsibility matrix

For each row, ask the provider to state the responsible party, whether it is included in its price, and any assumptions. “Shared” must identify who does what. “Included” must identify the price line that contains it.

5. Sector-specific questions

Complete only the branch that applies and assign an internal reviewer for specialist requirements.

Workplace

• How does attendance change by weekday and shift?
• Which meal periods, retail services, and catering needs are in scope?
• Who pays for meals, how does the employer contribution work, and who receives sales revenue?
• What minimum service should remain available on low-attendance days?

Healthcare

• Separate patient dining, staff dining, public retail, and catering volumes and responsibilities.
• Identify the responsible clinical team and its review process for therapeutic diets, nutrition requirements, and allergen procedures.
• Define meal-ordering, delivery, documentation, and system-integration requirements with the relevant internal teams.
• Identify continuity requirements, service windows, and escalation owners.

Sports

• Separate daily training, travel, competition, and special-event service.
• Identify the qualified nutrition lead who defines athlete requirements and approves menus.
• Specify schedule variability, peak rosters, delivery locations, and packaging needs.
• Explain how last-minute schedule changes will be communicated and priced.

Private schools

• Separate student, faculty, boarding, athletics, and event needs where applicable.
• Define the academic calendar, age groups, meal periods, and supervision responsibilities.
• Identify the internal owners of allergy procedures, nutrition requirements, and parent communication.
• Specify meal-account, payment, menu-publication, and ordering requirements.

6. Common pricing response

Ask every provider to respond in the same currency, evaluation period, and volume scenarios. Keep the original pricing basis visible. Request a full reconciliation to the provider's quoted total.

Evaluation period: [dates or months]. Currency: [currency]. Service days: [days]. Base volume: [number and unit]. Tax treatment: [included / separate / explain].

Also request:

1. The proposed commercial model and a plain-language explanation of who pays whom.
2. Any minimum charges, guarantees, volume thresholds, or variable fees, including how they are calculated.
3. The treatment of diner payments, employer contributions, catering revenue, credits, and rebates where relevant.
4. Pass-through items, markups, price-review dates, and adjustment methods.
5. A list of excluded and unpriced items with a method for determining their cost.
6. Prices for the same low, base, and high scenarios provided by the organization.
7. Quote validity and assumptions that would trigger a revised price.

Comparison rules

• Include a charge once. A component already included in a fixed fee must not be added again.
• Normalize a per-meal rate using the agreed number of meals; normalize daily charges using service days, not calendar days.
• Convert weekly, monthly, or annual charges using the actual evaluation schedule. Multiplying by 12 is appropriate only for 12 equivalent billed months.
• Keep first-period cost, steady recurring cost, and one-time investment visible separately.
• Show unknown costs as “unpriced”; do not substitute zero.
• Attribute sales offsets only to the party entitled to them under the proposed model. Ask the provider to reconcile employer cash cost explicitly.

7. Provider response format

Request responses in this order:

1. Understanding of the project and proposed service model.
2. Completed service schedule, assumptions, and responsibility matrix.
3. Staffing plan, coverage approach, and management support.
4. Completed pricing response and list of exclusions.
5. Implementation plan with dependencies and named roles.
6. Reporting plan and response process for missed expectations.
7. Relevant experience and references available with permission.
8. Open questions and decisions needed from the organization.

Ask providers to distinguish present capabilities from proposed additions. Request evidence relevant to this setting, volume, and operating model.

8. Evaluation worksheet

Agree on criteria before reviewing proposals. Set required conditions separately from weighted preferences. Do not award a high score where evidence is missing; record the gap for follow-up.

If using weights, check that they total 100% and define the scoring scale in advance. Keep the underlying evidence beside each score so a number cannot hide an unresolved requirement.

9. Transition plan

Ask for a sequence based on the actual service start date and the organization's existing commitments.

Record continuity arrangements for delays and name the person authorized to resolve each dependency.

10. Clarification log and next action

Before choosing a next step, confirm that both the organization and the provider understand the same volumes, responsibilities, exclusions, and decision process.

Optional next step: ask DiningScope for help refining the requirements or organizing the unresolved questions. Share only the information needed for that request, and identify any confidential material before including it.